Myself it really depends on what Germany does, though my standard moves are, Dest from SZ35 to SZ59, Sub from SZ40 to SZ45, The Subs a 50/50, some people like to take the carrier to the tran as well but, I prefer the Dest Alone. If Africa is going good, Namely if I can retake EGY, then the tran in SZ40 takes two inf from AUS and invades New Guinea (Something nice to try) If I cannot retake EGY I like to use the Tran to pick up 2 INF from AUS and then move to SZ30, then on UK2 drop them anywhere along the Africa coast (Even Persia if it needs them). If Germany takes EGY and you “can” retake it, then do it bringing 2 inf from IND, 1 INF from TRJ and the Fighter from SZ35 (You can also bring your Bomber but I usually don’t). Otherwise I like to stack 2 inf in TRJ and the 3 Indian Inf and A-A gun to Persia. The AC stays with the Tran wherever it decides to go. If Germany is stupid and doesn’t take EGY, then smile :lol: happily and move the INF from TRJ into it, stack 4 + A-A gun in Persia, move the FIG to EGY and move the Tran and AC to SZ33 (Out of reach of the IJN).
The SAF INF always moves up, regardless of what you do.
What national advantage rules do you use? (If you use them, and in LHTR)
-
By rules I mean, method of selecting. Using all of them would probably make the Allies too strong. 2 per Ally and 3 per Axis is what I usually use. Each power gets to choose their own.
-
Axis each choose one advantage and each nation gets two random advantages. (2d6 re-roll any duplicates)
-
german scientists really sucks in no tech games….
-
with LHTR we used all NAs.
worked pretty nice for us… the allied NAs kinda promote those nations to work together, while the axis NAs increase their strength directly. the jap BBs might be a little too good with rolling twice for 5, but all in all, it usually played out nicely and it was always interesting games :) -
I primarily use those which make the game more accurate historically. The Allies are assigned two each. Germany and Japan receive three each. In all cases, some are automatically assigned.
For Russia, Lend-Lease, but not quite the way it is in the rules, and Non-Agression Treaty, as it is a more historical situation. For Lend-Lease, the Russian player rolls two dice, and receives that amount of Lend-Lease credits, which are then used to buy units. These National Advantages are assigned.
For Germany, Luftwaffe Dive Bombers may only be used if their are no fighters present. Historically, Stukas were easy prey for fighters if Germany did not have complete air superiority. Otherwise, whatever three that the German player rolls.
For the UK, Radar and Colonial Garrison are assigned.
For Japan, the Tokyo Express is assigned, and in place of Dug-In Defenders, I simply have all Japanese infantry taking two hits to kill, i.e. “Fight to the Last Man”. The player can make either one or two rolls, depending on whether he/she used the FLM rule.
For the US, Island Bases and Marines, sometimes raiding my A&A Pacific set for the units.
I also normally give the US the Combined Bombardment and Long-Range Aircraft technologies to start. Because of the size of the US, the US has always put a high emphasis on range in its aircraft, and was using external drop tanks and internal bomb bay tanks in its aircraft from the start of the war. The pre-war planning for an amphibious war in the Pacific had the US Navy thinking shore bombardment long before the war started.If I used LHTR rules, I would allow the Japanese to use the Super Battleship advantage only if the US also gets the same rating for its Iowa-class ships. One change would be that the Yamato-class ships would defend against surface units at a 5, but need a 4 or less to defend against air attack. The Japanese naval AA fire was simply not that good throughout the entire war. The Iowas stay at 5 and 5, as the US had the best naval AA fire of the war.
For the US, I would still use the Island Bases, but also go with War Economy, however, production cost reduction would be 2 IPC and not 1. US wartime production was enormous.
-
To limit the Yamato Class Battlehips by reducign their defensive fire against air to a 4, then you also would need to increase them to THREE hits to sink.
Marianas Turkey Shoot. It was 200 and what hits to sink that single BB?
-
@ncscswitch:
To limit the Yamato Class Battlehips by reducign their defensive fire against air to a 4, then you also would need to increase them to THREE hits to sink.
Marianas Turkey Shoot. It was 200 and what hits to sink that single BB?
The Mushashi was sunk during the Sibuyan Sea phase of the Battle of Leyte Gulf, on October 24, 1944. It is estimated that the ship took 20 torpedo hits, 17 direct bomb hits, and 18 near-misses by bombs prior to sinking. After Action analysis by the US Navy and the post-war report done by the US Naval Technical Mission to Japan analyzing the loss of major Japanese warships (I have my own copy and also a complete set of the reports on microfilm) indicated that one of the reasons for the survival of the ship following so many hits was the relatively even distribution of them on both the port and starboard sides, in effect counterflooding the ship and preventing it from capsizing. Extremely heavy damage forward from both bombs and torpedoes resulted in the ship sinking by the head, and capsizing in the process of sinking.
The Yamato was sunk on April 7, 1945 during the attempt to sortie to the Okinawa invasion in an effort to attack the transport fleet. The ship was hit by an estimated 13 torpedoes, and at least 8 comfirmed bombs. I suspect that there were more unreported bomb hits, and no count was made of near misses. The US torpedo plane pilots had been briefed to concentrate their attacks on one side, and all but 2 torpedo hits were on the port side. The two on the starboard side were assessed at prolonging the process of sinking. The Yamato did capsize to port, and the after magazines exploded when she sank.
In neither case did the ships have fighter cover, so they were totally dependent on anti-aircraft fire from themselves and the rest of the task force. In neither case did the losses of US Navy aircraft attacking the ships exceed 10%. In comparable attacks on US battleships, Japanese attacking aircraft losses started at 50% and at times reached 90%. That is my basis for reducing the Yamato-class defensive fire against aircraft.
I am also very familiar with the protective schemes of both the Yamato and the Iowa class. The Yamato class did have a major flaw with its torpedo protection system that left it highly vulnerable to flooding from a shallow torpedo hit, to some extent compensated by the depth of the side protection system. There is also a problem with the torpedo protection system on the Iowa, which required modifying the liquid-loading scheme to restore full effectiveness. Overall, I would rate the Yamato and Iowa equal in damage resistance.
I guess that I am looking at it more from the standpoint of a naval tactical gamer where individual ship characteristics can be easily factored in, verses a strategic game, where that is hard to do so, unless you have a pronounced disparity. Also, keeping track of Three hits verses Two is much more difficult. I will have to come up with another way of factoring in poor Japanese AA fire. Two hits, and 5 attack and 5 defend it is.
Suggested Topics
